Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation

Lab Partnerships
Brief on Lessons Learned and Recommendations

Introduction
USAID Advancing Nutrition engaged in a learning activity with the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab to
document experiences on partnering and develop recommendations on how innovation labs can partner
to improve nutrition outcomes. During the 10-year award period (2010-2020), the Nutrition Innovation
Lab partnered with a range of organizations, including other USAID innovation labs, to advance nutrition
outcomes. Near the end of the award period, USAID Advancing Nutrition collaborated with the
Nutrition Innovation Lab to document and identify successes, challenges, lessons, and opportunities to
improve partnerships moving forward. This brief is intended for USAID innovation labs, technical
advisors, and program managers to help them to plan and establish successful partnerships to improve
nutrition.

Objectives and Learning Questions

This activity had three learning objectives:
 Determine how the Nutrition Innovation Lab partnered to improve nutrition-related research
and its uptake.
 Document the perceived outcomes of these partnerships.
 Identify lessons and recommendations from the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s experience for the
next iteration of the Nutrition and other innovation labs.
We developed the six learning questions below with USAID and the Nutrition Innovation Lab in
alignment with these objectives. We defined partners as any individual or organization that the Nutrition
Innovation Lab identified as a collaborator that was not the management entity (Tufts University) or a
United States (U.S.)-based consortium partner.1
Partnership Implementation
1. What types of partnerships did the Nutrition Innovation Lab engage in to try to improve
nutrition-related research or its use?
a. What were the main objectives of these partnerships (e.g., host-country institutional
relationships, research, innovation transfer, dissemination, scaling)?

1 Johns Hopkins University, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston Children’s Hospital, Purdue University, Tuskegee University,
and Cornell University.

USAID ADV A NCING NUTRI TI ON

The Agency’s Flagship Multi-Sectoral Nutrition Project

SEPTEMBER 2020
Partnership Outcomes
2. What types of partnerships did or did not help the Nutrition Innovation Lab to improve
nutrition- and agriculture-related research or its use?
a. What factors facilitated or limited the success of these partnerships?
3. What nutrition-related outcomes did the Nutrition Innovation Lab achieve through these
partnerships?
b. Which of these outcomes did the Nutrition Innovation Lab think would not have been
possible without partnerships?
4. How did partnerships help the Nutrition Innovation Lab to improve the relevance and use of
nutrition-related research for multi-sectoral nutrition programs?

Lessons and Recommendations

5. What are lessons about how innovation labs can partner to improve nutrition-related research
or its uptake and use?
6. What are recommendations for how innovation labs can partner to improve nutrition-related
research or its uptake and use?

Approach
We reviewed project documents and conducted semi-structured interviews to answer the learning
questions, understand the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s range of partnerships, and identify key lessons and
recommendations. However, given the number of partnerships that the Nutrition Innovation Lab had
over its 10 years in operation, we chose to focus on partnerships in two countries to explore the
composition, activities, achievements, and challenges of partnerships. The Nutrition Innovation Lab
identified Malawi and Nepal as countries with successful partnerships that we could use as illustrative
examples.
We reviewed 28 documents and extracted information in a common template. The template reflected
the key themes related to the learning questions. The Nutrition Innovation Lab did not include
intermediate indicators related to partnership implementation or collaboration in its evaluation plan, so
we could not use monitoring and evaluation data to assess the strengths and weaknesses of
partnerships.
We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 key informants based in the U.S., Malawi, and Nepal
from five interviewee groups (table 1). We completed thematic analysis of the interview notes to
identify themes related to the learning questions.
Table 1. Interview Sample
Interviewee Group U.S.- Malawi-based Nepal-based Total
based
USAID 1 1
USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab 4 4
Government 1 2 3
University or research institute 1 2 3
Nongovernmental organization 1 1
Total 5 2 5 12
Note: We conducted two interviews with two representatives from the Nutrition Innovation Lab participating in each interview.

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 2

Once we completed the data analysis, we shared our preliminary findings with USAID and the Nutrition
Innovation Lab to vet and ensure they reflected the experiences of the Nutrition Innovation Lab. In
addition, we sent the preliminary findings to the Global Knowledge Initiative (GKI), which is developing a
community of practice to facilitate collaboration between the innovation labs. GKI is investigating the
partnership experiences of all of the innovation labs, so it was able to provide feedback on our findings
based on its broader perspective.

Overview of the Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships

Overall, the Nutrition Innovation Lab engaged in at least 63 partnerships across 17 countries (table 2).
Most were with international or U.S.-based organizations, followed by organizations based in Asia and
Africa. Partners range from universities and other research institutions to nongovernmental
organizations (including international organizations with in-country offices) and hospitals.
Table 2. Nutrition Innovation Lab Partners by Geography (includes informal partnerships)
Organization Type Other (U.S. or Asia Africa Total
International)
USAID nutrition program 2 2

Government (including 4 3 5 12
intergovernmental)
University/school 13 3 8 24

Research institution 1 4 5 10

Nongovernmental organization 5 6 3 14

Hospital 1 1

Total 25 16 22 63
Note: We developed this list using the partners included in the introduction section of the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s annual reports, which it
included from 2014 to 2019.

Partnerships in Malawi
The Government of Malawi has elevated nutrition as a national priority, as illustrated through its
National Nutrition Policy and Strategic Plan (2007–2011) and recent National Multi-Sectoral Nutrition
Policy (2018–2022). The Nutrition Innovation Lab received buy-in funds in 2012 and an Associate’s
Award in 2014 for nutrition capacity building to support these policies and the implementation of
nutrition interventions. The Nutrition Innovation Lab's three primary activities were the following:
 Building pre-service training capacity by creating a national food composition table.
 Guiding the development and implementation of a dietetics program.
 Providing recommendations on how to update the national medical curriculum with nutrition
content.
Activities were implemented in collaboration with at least seven implementing partners and in
consultation with a range of stakeholders. Government representatives, including the Ministry of Health
Department of Nutrition and HIV/AIDS and the directorate of clinical services were engaged in the

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 3

Nutrition Innovation Lab's activities. Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources
(LUANAR) and the South Africa Research Council developed the national food composition table, while
the Ministry of Health agreed to host the completed table and database. LUANAR and the College of
Medicine hosted the dietetics training program; national and international hospitals served as clinical
internships sites for students; and the government provided employment opportunities for graduates.
The Nutrition Innovation Lab developed a framework for incorporating nutrition education into the
medical curriculum and interviewed stakeholders from various disciplines for their input. More
information on the implementation and outcomes of these partnerships is below.
Partnerships in Nepal
In Nepal, the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s work also supported policy implementation, but adopted a
more research-oriented approach. Researchers examined ways to help policymakers overcome
nutrition program and implementation challenges while also producing evidence as a global public good.
Its work aimed to help the Nepalese government develop its Multi-sectoral Nutrition Plan (2018–2022)
by providing evidence linking agriculture to nutrition. Research centered on the following high-level
questions:
 In what ways do investments in agriculture achieve significant measurable impacts in nutrition?
As a corollary, can pathways to impact be empirically demonstrated?
 How can large-scale programs best incorporate such knowledge into cost-effective multi-
sectoral interventions aimed at improving nutrition?
 How can policy and program implementation processes be enhanced to support both nutrition-
specific and nutrition-sensitive actions?
The Nutrition Innovation Lab collaborated with more than 12 partners to implement seven major
research programs, some smaller-scale research studies, and dissemination and capacity-building
activities. Some of these partnerships were formed using memoranda of understanding (MOU), such as
with the Ministry of Health and Population Family Welfare Division (formerly known as the Child Health
Division), Institute of Medicine at Tribhuvan University, and the Ministry of Health and Population
National Training Center, while others were more informal and did not involve a financial component,
such as with the National Planning Commission, Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, and development
partners including United Nations Children’s Fund, World Food Programme, and the Food and
Agricultural Organization.
An example of larger-scale research activities included the Policy and Science for Health, Agriculture,
and Nutrition (PoSHAN) surveys, led by Johns Hopkins University in collaboration with Helen Keller
International (HKI) and local researchers at the Valley Research Group and Patan Academy of Health
Sciences. The activity engaged existing multi-sectoral programs to complete two multi-year studies,
including the PoSHAN policy process and community surveys. They gathered nationally representative
data on nutrition status, drivers of malnutrition, the association between agriculture and nutrition, and
other important data to inform evidence-based policy and programs. Another activity examined the
relationship of aflatoxin, pregnancy outcomes, and early growth and involved partners from Ministry of
Health and Population Family Welfare Division, Patan Academy, HKI Nepal, ward and village
government stakeholders, and Nepalgunj Medical College. In addition, a sub-study involved collaboration
between the Nutrition and the Post-Harvest Loss Innovation Labs.
In addition to research, the Nutrition Innovation Lab provided training to local partner field staff and
students at collaborating universities on data collection and analysis. It also worked with partners to
hold multiple national survey design and data collection workshops in-country and worked with three
universities to develop new public health nutrition degrees and/or curriculum updates. The Nutrition
Innovation Lab also leveraged support from local and international partners to disseminate findings

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 4

through seven international scientific symposiums in Nepal. These events convened national
policymakers and other stakeholders interested in using research on agriculture, nutrition, and health to
inform policy and programs. Although topics and formats varied, the symposiums included activities such
as oral and poster presentations of findings, policy panels, and student workshops.

Key Findings
Through the document review and semi-structured interviews, we identified key findings and lessons
learned about partnership frameworks, implementation, partnership outcomes, and recommendations
to answer the learning questions. Our findings largely draw from the experiences of the Nutrition
Innovation Lab in Malawi and Nepal; however, we also present some findings about partnerships in
other countries based on project documents and interviews with Nutrition Innovation Lab and USAID
staff. First, we discuss findings related to how the partnerships were identified and implemented, and
factors that facilitated and constrained the partnerships. Second, we present findings related to
outcomes of the partnerships, including the types of outcomes that the Nutrition Innovation Lab
achieved through partnerships.
Partnership Implementation
Partnership Identification and Development
Strategic partnership identification was crucial to set the groundwork for success. In each
country, the Nutrition Innovation Lab started by identifying local and international organizations with an
on-the-ground presence. The identification and development of partnerships was an important first step
that set a foundation for successful partnerships and implementation in each country. From the
beginning, the Nutrition Innovation Lab would first identify what types of partners they would need
throughout the course of their work in a country based on their intended objectives and outcomes,
bulleted below. As one Nutrition Innovation Lab interviewee said, “We knew what the end result
needed to be, so you work backward to make sure you touch all the right bases.”
 Conducting research and building research capacity were central goals of the Nutrition
Innovation Lab’s work. Capacity building of researchers in-country was both a goal and necessity
to complete research. This required partnerships with governments, universities, NGOs, and
other innovation labs.
 Providing credibility and generating buy-in was generated through partnerships with local
academics and government ministries. This was needed to support research and its uptake.
 Using and applying research findings to inform intervention design and policy development
was the ultimate objective of the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s work. Partners who used findings
included USAID Missions, implementing partners, and the private sector.
The Nutrition Innovation Lab engaged partners that could help achieve each of these goals from the
beginning, rather than phasing in different types of partners as work progressed. As a Nutrition
Innovation Lab interviewee said, “Based on the set of questions that we ask in different countries we try
to figure out... who would need to be engaged to operationalize any finding that comes out from this
research – from the beginning – and seek out their partnership, from the beginning.”
Once the Nutrition Innovation Lab identified the key players were in a country that they needed to
engage, they worked to engage those must-have partners. One Malawi partner interviewee described
the utility of this approach, saying that the Nutrition Innovation Lab “identified the major players for
things to happen...they would bring all these major players together to have this solid output. I find that
important strategic thinking.” It typically began engaging actors and organizations through formal
channels facilitated by the government and the USAID Mission, and as needed, would follow up through
informal channels, and “use informal channels to cement the formal ones,” according to a Nutrition

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 5

Innovation Lab interviewee. The Nutrition Innovation Lab also used a snowballing approach to begin
conversations with the actors and institutions it knew and asked them to introduce it other key players.
Beyond the must-have partners, the Nutrition Innovation Lab identified others that could help achieve
its goals. As one Nutrition Innovation Lab interviewee said, “The choice comes with other partners,”
who were not must-have partners, such as “Implementing partners for intervention trials, for example,
or related activities.” Because there were more of these types of partners, Nutrition Innovation Lab staff
assessed the fit and any potential reputational, delivery, or financial risks before moving forward. One
way that they identified these partners was through a call for proposals. Instead of typical call for a U.S.
institution that would partner with country organizations, the Nutrition Innovation Lab called for
proposals from country organizations that selected U.S. institutions to work with. This process, while
challenging at times to implement, enabled the Nutrition Innovation Lab to engage partners that it did
not previously know.
The Nutrition Innovation Lab relied on a range local partners to conduct activities in each country. For
example, the AflaCohort study examined the impact of mycotoxin exposure on child growth in Nepal
required the Nutrition Innovation Lab to collect breast milk and blood samples at regular intervals from
17 rural communities. This required establishing cold chains to process and store samples. To do so, the
Nutrition Innovation Lab developed formal relationships with hospitals and clinics that provided access
to laboratories, office space, and nursing staff. Ward and village-level governments provided access to
meeting halls and community health volunteers. These partnerships were essential to the extensive data
collection activities over the 4-year study period.
One lesson that the Nutrition Innovation Lab learned was that it was fundamental to their success that
they engaged several partners, rather than relying on one or two. One Nutrition Innovation Lab
interviewee explained that staff spread out as soon as they arrived in Nepal to develop a web of
contacts. As a result, they had other actors and partners that they could work with as a back-up plan if
someone left her/his position. Staff also worked to ensure that they had institutional engagement that
went beyond specific individuals and maintained a range of partnerships because nutrition research is
inherently multi-sectoral.
While the Nutrition Innovation Lab sought to engage all types of partners from the beginning, its work
and objectives evolved over time. As this happened, it adapted existing and began new partnerships to
meet new goals.
Partnerships varied based on the partners and goals. While the Nutrition Innovation Lab formally
engaged many partners through MOU and sub-awards, it did not formalize relationships with partners in
all cases. It typically found it advantageous to formalize relationships, however, one Nutrition Innovation
Lab interviewee noted, there is a danger of over-formalizing partnerships. The Nutrition Innovation Lab
found pros and cons to financial relationships with partners. Sub-awards were required for partners that
were responsible for managing and conducting data collection. The Nutrition Innovation Lab also
supported graduate students in the U.S. and in-country to conduct research. In addition, it provided
financial support for some discrete activities, such as funding logistic support and scholarships for
exchange visits, with organizations with which it had MOU.
Facilitating Factors
Partnership engagement was integral to day-to-day work. Partnership engagement and
management was a routine and expected part of all Nutrition Innovation Lab management field staff
roles and responsibilities. Partnerships were considered core to all of the Nutrition Innovation
Lab’s work, so it did not silo partner engagement and interactions under a specific staff position.
However, for each country, the Nutrition Innovation Lab found it helpful to have a point person at the
global level, a local representative, and a principal investigator for each study. These individuals worked
with the USAID Missions and were ultimately responsible for ensuring that partnerships were cultivated,

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 6

maintained, and successful. The mission staff in Nepal were particularly helpful in introductions to
various government contacts, some of whom became important partners in the research and capacity-
building agendas.

“One of the most important achievements was not just about the training but

also to support us to get established...They were very helpful in making sure

the government got on board – this linkage and coordination.”

—Malawi-based partner

Established and communicated clear roles, responsibilities, and objectives. The Nutrition
Innovation Lab recognized the importance of establishing clear roles and responsibilities with partners.
One partner interviewee in Nepal noted that when implementing complex research studies, it was
particularly important to maintain distinct roles and responsibilities between partners. A partner
interviewee in Malawi explained that a key strength of the partnership was that the Nutrition Innovation
Lab had and communicated clear objectives.
Capacity building helped partners deliver results. The Nutrition Innovation Lab provided capacity
building to partners through technical assistance, training, and collaboration. Partners reported that the
Nutrition Innovation Lab largely provided high-quality technical assistance and helped build staff capacity,
as discussed more in the next section. This capacity building helped partners to be successful in their
collaboration with the Nutrition Innovation Lab. For example, A partner interviewee in Malawi said,
“We only properly support these things when we [have] capacity.” A partner interviewee in Nepal
noted that capacity building helped ensure that it collected high-quality data. Another partner
interviewee emphasized the importance of building the capacity of students, stating that, “Every single
partnership that I’ve developed under the Innovation Lab that has been successful has been a partnership
that was tied to a graduate student.” Students brought partners together to participate on advisory
committees, facilitated access to data, and supported field experiences and other activities, serving as
the “glue holding everything together.”
Fostered relationships that supported teamwork. Several partners noted that their relationship
with the Nutrition Innovation Lab was conducive to collaboration, teamwork, and joint problem-solving.
A partner in Malawi characterized its relationship with the Nutrition Innovation Lab as “A highly
successful environment.” The Nutrition Innovation Lab team was passionate and engaged. The drive of
their staff was important to help move activities despite delays from partner organizations. A partner

Success Story
The Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Post-harvest Loss Reduction and the Nutrition Innovation

Lab conducted research examining mycotoxin contamination in Nepal. Although the labs had

slightly different research objectives, they collected similar data in some of the same communities.

Initially, there was some misunderstanding when trying to reconcile this redundancy, but after

discussion, the labs came to an agreement. For overlapping study areas, the Post-harvest Lab

agreed to use the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s survey data, which the Nutrition Innovation Lab had

already collected. The Post-harvest Lab gathered its own data in the sites that fell outside the

Nutrition Innovation Lab’s research scope. Through this agreement, the labs avoided duplication

and an additional time burden on study participants. They also collaborated to build the evidence

base on agriculture for nutrition, informing Nepal’s multi-sector response to nutrition and food

safety issues.

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 7

interviewee from Malawi said there is a difference in results when there are staff “who are really keen to
deliver irrespective of the challenges.” In addition, several partners said that the Nutrition Innovation
Lab staff developed relationships that were based on respect, trust, openness, and transparency. A
partner interviewee in Nepal explained that s/he “Developed and maintained mutual trust between
[his/her organization] and the Nutrition Innovation Lab, along with other related partners.” One partner
in Nepal said it was able to solve problems because the Nutrition Innovation Lab was open, transparent,
ready to listen, and respectful it positions. Another described how the Nutrition Innovation Lab was
proactive when challenges arose and provided support to overcome them, whether that required
improving communication at a management level, or providing technical assistance or other support to
help complete work. In addition, the Nutrition Innovation Lab tried to ensure that partners felt that
achievements were collective.
Partners valued information-sharing and networking. The Nutrition Innovation Lab organized
formal research meetings with partners. In countries such as Nepal, these were held annually. The
Nutrition Innovation Lab also held a large research meeting in Boston that partners across country
programs traveled to. Several partner interviewees said these meetings allowed them to share research,
learn from others, and network. As one partner interview said,
The annual meetings in Nepal provided a venue to allow students and me to present work and
engage with a broader community of scholars… and policy makers that I would otherwise not
be in contact with… Providing a community and celebrating and validating my work has been
part of the partnership that caused me to reinvest my time and energy in a way that [I] would
have not done otherwise.
The Nutrition Innovation Lab also linked partners that were not connected previously. In Malawi, for
example, the Nutrition Innovation Lab established linkages between government and local university
partners. A partner interviewee in Malawi explained that the Nutrition Innovation Lab had a “vertical
and horizontal approach,” in bringing together high-level actors and partners that could implement the
work. The Nutrition Innovation Lab was also able to facilitate meetings and introduce partners to high-
level policymakers, such as the United States Ambassador.
Constraining Factors
Partners did not report significant challenges. The partner interviewees did not report significant
partnership challenges other than those beyond their control, such as delays in local research ethics
reviews or constraints stemming from the enabling environment. The Nutrition Innovation Lab noted
that it had challenges with some types of partners, particularly the private sector, and in some cases,
academic institutions and ministries. These partners required significant engagement and identification of
supportive individuals within the organizations.
Partnerships and relationships were resource intensive. The Nutrition Innovation Lab reported
having to invest a significant amount of time to develop and maintain partnerships, which had budget
implications that USAID did not always acknowledge. As one Nutrition Innovation Lab interviewee
quipped, “Time for partnership is kind of an open-ended black hole and we just accept that we have to
do it.” While the Nutrition Innovation Lab recognized the time required to develop partnerships and
the value in doing so, the investment required was challenging at times. Nutrition Innovation Lab staff
traveled extensively both to establish and implement partnerships. In addition, establishing partnerships
for research studies was a long-term endeavor.
Differing perspectives and priorities posed challenges. While this was only reported in a
minority of cases, it was a challenge when partners had different perspectives and understanding of their
roles and objectives. In some cases, these differences resulted from personality or other individual
factors; in others, it was due to differences in disciplinary or sector backgrounds. For instance, one
partner interviewee noted that some challenges and misunderstandings about roles and responsibilities

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 8

derived from partners coming from different fields, like agriculture and nutrition, which resulted in a bit
of a conflict. In other cases, partners simply had unequal funding amounts from USAID or competing
priorities that took precedent over work with the Nutrition Innovation Lab. There was also a
misunderstanding about roles between innovation labs that needed to be (and was) resolved to avoid
overlap of data collection.
Funding delays constrained partners’ implementation. USAID delays in Nutrition Innovation Lab
funding led to delays in partner funding, which delayed activities when partners did not have enough
money to conduct them. Larger organizations based in the United States were able to continue working
through funding delays, but in-country partners were typically not. The timing for receiving funding from
USAID on an annual basis was also uncertain, so partners did not know when to expect the funds or
how long to plan for funding gaps.
Communication could be a challenge. While partner interviewees largely reported that they had
good communication with the Nutrition Innovation Lab, there were some communication constraints. It
was challenging to maintain full communication with Nutrition Innovation Lab staff based in the United
States. One partner in Nepal described how it tried to maintain communication, but sometimes shared
information during in-person meetings that was new or unexpected. In some cases, connectivity
problems constrained cross-country communication as well.
Partnership Outcomes
Partnerships were vital to all of the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s outcomes. Partnerships were
critical for meeting the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s immediate capacity building and research objectives as
well as ensuring the long-term impact of activities through the uptake of findings. An interviewee from
the Nutrition Innovation Lab stated, “I can't think of one [outcome] that wasn’t done through
partnership.” S/he reiterated that “The entire endeavor was based on partnership.” The Nutrition
Innovation Lab did not differentiate outcomes or achievements by partners, as USAID did not request
this disaggregation. Many participants assessed the success of partnerships based on the overall
outcomes of their research and capacity-building activities, citing indicators such as the number of
research publications, articles, presentations prepared, and people trained. We do not detail the many
achievements of the Nutrition Innovation Lab here, but below we summarize other results that
interviewees suggested relied on partnerships.
Strengthened local capacity. Most of the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s activities included a capacity-
building component, even if it was not the primary objective. Interviewees said that capacity building was
both a necessary input and key outcome of the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s successful partnerships. It was
also deemed critical to sustained institutional and individual capacity to continue key activities (research,
teaching, laboratory work, and policymaking) beyond the life of the innovation lab projects. For example,
partners in Nepal did not have expertise required to conduct the complex longitudinal research
activities, so the Nutrition Innovation Lab provided training to field staff in statistical analysis, survey
methods, and research ethics. This build the skills of partner organizations while improving the quality of
research. Similarly, the Nutrition Innovation Lab helped build the scope and rigor of the Nepal Health
Research Committee’s standards in conducting institutional reviews of human subjects’ research. The
Nutrition Innovation Lab also emphasized training for postgraduate students who contributed vital
human resources to the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s research activities while also providing development
opportunities for young nutrition and research professionals. Through these activities, the Nutrition
Innovation Lab produced in-country and U.S.-based graduate students who continue to work in food
security and nutrition.
Fostered lasting relationships between and among partners. Workshops, annual symposiums,
and other activities supported networking between partners. One partner interviewee asserted that,
“As a growing leader and scientist in this country, linkages are important.” Efforts linking local partners

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 9

and governments were perceived as an important, long-term outcome of the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s
programs.
Facilitated uptake of research results to influence programs and policy. Partnerships with
local research institutions, academics, implementing partners were necessary to implement activities and
facilitated research uptake and dissemination. They played a role by directly applying relevant findings to
their programs in Nepal and Malawi. For example, in Nepal, a partner interviewee reported that the
partner incorporated research findings into its work on post-harvest loss, including by supporting

“[The study] was an incredible experience for all of us. Because we worked

through it all and [came] out with interesting new findings. There was a sense

that we did something really worthwhile and beneficial.”

—Nepal-based partner

adoption of improved food-drying technology. Local partners were also key to the Nutrition Innovation
Lab’s policy outcomes because local actors “are also the ones who are involved and engaged in the local
government…they are the ones who will present findings to the local government. They are the ones
who convince and advocate to their government for action.”
The Nutrition Innovation Lab saw the translation of research findings into policy as the most important
outcome of its work. All interviewees generally felt that the Nutrition Innovation Lab was successful at
influencing policy, although it could not always directly link its research to policy change. One USAID
interviewee described how partnership and collaboration contributed to these achievements by
describing a workshop in Nepal to present findings of the mycotoxin research and collaboration
activities. The Nutrition Innovation Lab convened a diverse range of local actors but largely targeted
government stakeholders for this event, including high-level representatives from Ministries of
Agriculture, Health, Finance, and the strategic planning committee. The USAID interviewee was
impressed by policymakers’ involvement. “The level of attendance and commitment from attendees to
stay throughout the whole [workshop], even at the high level, you don’t usually see that.” Other
interviewees described specific policy outcomes of the Nutrition Innovation Lab’s work. For example,
the Government of Malawi created 27 dietician positions at hospitals across the country as a result of
the dietetics training program, and the Government of Nepal and partners are planning to develop food
safety action plans based on the Afla Cohort study’s findings.

Recommendations
Based on the findings, USAID Advancing Nutrition developed recommendations to improve the
effectiveness of partnerships for research. While these recommendations may not be specific to the
nutrition sector, they are applicable to partnerships operating in multi-sectoral nutrition environments.
● Select partners strategically. Clearly defining what partnering will do to achieve desired
results helps to identify partners that will be strategic. Identifying the partner capacities that will
be useful, and how each will contribute to project outcomes should take place before identifying
potential partners. Though this might take more time and planning at the outset or require
building new relationships, it will maximize the benefits of partnering in the long run.
● Have multiple types of partners and tailor arrangements. Categorizing types of
partnerships is strategic and important for success. Determining, for example, that you need
some partners to help conduct the work, others to lend credibility and generate buy-in, and

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 10

 others to test and apply findings will help you decide on potential partners and how each
partnership should be constructed. Having the right mix of partners at the right times will help
to achieve outcomes. Some partners may require formal MOU for long-term partnering, while
others might only require regular communication. Similarly, some might require financial
support, while others only the investment of time.
● Develop institutional and alternate partnerships. Given the natural turnover that occurs
at organizations over the life of a program, it is important to develop mechanisms to ensure
partnerships and programs extend beyond a specific individual. This includes establishing
relationships with several individuals at each organization and developing connections with
“backup partners” in case a partnership with one organization falters.
 Establish clear reasons for partnerships, and then roles and responsibilities. It is vital
that partners have a clear understanding of their respective roles and responsibilities. This not
only needs to be established up front but reinforced or revisited as partnerships progress. To
ensure that partners from different sectors or disciplinary backgrounds have the same
understanding of their roles, ensure a common understanding of research terminology given
their different use across disciplines.
● Monitor partnership processes and outcomes. Defining what a successful partnership
looks like and how to monitor its outputs and outcomes will help with reporting and adaptive
management. Designing and referencing appropriate intermediate indicators can inform when
program adjustments may be needed and will build accountability for reaching goals. It will also
highlight which components of partnering are critical for success and which may be barriers.
Including process indicators to monitor partnership development activities, such as meetings,
conferences, and exchange visits, will make it more likely that these activities will be prioritized
and adapted.
● Allocate time and budget to developing and monitoring partnerships. The process of
partnering takes time and other resources. As such, ensuring that this is built into work plans
and scopes of work is important to enable successful partnerships. Establishing new partnerships
requires technical and operational time and money to build relationships, comply with processes
and regulations, define goals, develop work plans, build capacity, and develop communications
protocols. Maintaining and deepening partnerships can also be supported through specific
activities that require funding, such as meetings, conferences, and exchange visits. If these are
built into work plans, successful outcomes within realistic timeframes are more likely.
● Foster information-sharing and networking between partners. Using opportunities to
build relationships between partners can help to sustain outcomes as the partners create their
own networks, strengthen capacities, and generate new ways of working together even after the
originally defined partnership ends. Opportunities for face-to-face events on a regular (even
annual) basis was noted as an ideal way to strengthen collaboration and networks.
● Draw in high-level policymakers. Engage policymakers from the beginning by determining
what type of buy-in your project needs and what benefits policymakers can provide. This will
help establish the credibility of the research, attract other partners and stakeholders, increase
dissemination and uptake of findings, and help to get the work done. Though these policymakers
may not be formal or long-term partners, engaging them from the beginning will help you meet
your goals and the needs of the people you serve.

Learning from the USAID Nutrition Innovation Lab Partnerships | 11

USAID ADVANCING NUTRITION USAID Advancing Nutrition is the Agency’s flagship multi-sectoral
nutrition project, addressing the root causes of malnutrition to save
Implemented by:
lives and enhance long-term health and development.
JSI Research & Training Institute, Inc.
2733 Crystal Drive
4th Floor
Arlington, VA 22202
This document was produced for the U. S. Agency for International
Phone: 703–528–7474
Development. It was prepared under the terms of contract
Email: info@advancingnutrition.org 7200AA18C00070 awarded to JSI Research & Training Institute, Inc. The
Web: advancingnutrition.org contents are the responsibility of JSI and do not necessarily reflect the
views of USAID or the U.S. Government.
September 2020